






oo oo oT | 


- TION PROVIDING FOR THE CREA- 


occ mI 
ARGUMENTS SUBMITTED IN CON- 


NECTION WITH A REFERENDUM 
ON PROPOSED FEDERAL LEGISLA- 


TION OF A DEPARTMENT OF EDU- 
CATION AND FEDERAL AID FOR 
EDUCATION Se masini ge 


American Council on Education 
818 CONNECTICUT AVENUE 


WASHINGTON, D. C. ; 
[LACT om 








A DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND 
FEDERAL AID FOR EDUCATION 


Origin of the Proposals. 


The establishment of a Department of Education has been advo- 
cated from time to time for many years. In fact, the Federal office 
now known as the Bureau of Education was first created as an inde- 
pendent department. The head of it, however, was a commissioner, 
not a Cabinet officer. In 1868, a year after its establishment, it was 
reduced to the rank of a bureau in the Department of the Interior. 
The question of the re-establishment of it as a separate department has 
several times been broached. The movement in this direction has of 
late years gathered momentum because of the great complexity of the 
Government’s educational interests and because of the increasing con- 
sciousness throughout the country of the national significance of edu- 
cation. 

For several years there has been a bill before the Senate, periodically 
introduced by Senator Owen. It is a very brief and simple measure 
which provides in substances for the transformation of the Bureau of 
Education into a Department of Education, with appropriations ade- 
quate to enable it to investigate educational conditions and to promote 
desirable educational movements throughout the country. The bill 
has never secured sufficient backing to be favorably reported by the 
committee which has had it in charge. 

At the time the United States entered the war, the educational ac- 
tivities of the Government were carried on in more than thirty sepa- 
rate departments, boards, commissions and bureaus. Large funds were 
involved in the aggregate undertaking. Yet there was no relation be- 
tween the several agencies. There resulted competition, duplication of 
effort, diffusion of power, confusion of the public mind. 

The war emphasized anew the national bearing of education. Edu- 
cation was seen to have a very intimate relation to national strength. 
The three great problems of the war, (1) The raising and training 
of an army; (2) the equipping of the army; and (3) the development 
of the public morale, were seen to be largely educational problems. 
Particularly the first and the third could not be solved without the 
help of schools and universities. It was soon apparent that what was 
needed was a strong Federal agency for education capable of studying 


~. the field as a whole, of formulating a national educational program 


and of apportioning to the several instrumentalities—Federal, state 
and local—those parts of the work which each was best fitted to per- 
form. 

It was the consciousness of this need for a single and united leader- 
ship in the national emergency that stimulated two bodies representing 
educational interests to urge upon Congress again the establishment 


1 


of a Department of Education as a war measure. In February, 1918, 
a committee of the American Council on Education prepared a report 
setting forth the necessity for a Department of Education and re- 
questing the Senate Committee on Education and Labor to give favor- 
able consideration to the Owen bill then before it. Senator Hoke Smith, 
the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Education and Labor, was 
sympathetic with the committee’s desires, but was of the opinion that 
a broader measure than the Owen bill was needed in order to secure 
the support of Congress and to meet the demands of the existing emer- 
gency. The committee of the American Council on Education ac- 
cordingly set about the preparation of a measure which would con- 
form with the views both of Congress and of the constituent associa- 
tions of the Council. 


Meanwhile another movement started. At the end of February, 
1918, the National Education Association appointed a Commission 
on the National Emergency in Education. The commission began at 
once to study the principal defects of the national educational system 
as revealed by the war. These were believed to be: (a) the failure 
of the schools to reach the non-English speaking aliens and native 
illiterates; (b) the failure of the schools to provide an effective pro- 
gram of health education; (c) the great inequalities of public schools 
and particularly the inferiority of many rural schools; and (d) the 
lack of a sufficient supply of trained teachers. The commission early 
came to the conclusion that these defects could not be speedily reme- 
died without substantial subsidies from the Federal Government. It 
therefore proposed to draft a bill which would provide, not only for 
a Department of Education to unify and co-ordinate the Govern- 
ment’s educational efforts, but also for large Federal appropriations 
to be apportioned among the states in such a way as to cure the worst 
of the defects noted above. The first form of the bill to be presented 
to Congress was introduced by Senator Smith and bore the number 
S. 4987. Subsequently, as the result of criticisms from various quar- 
ters, it was revised and reintroduced as the Smith-Towner bill (S. 1017 
and H. R. 7) in May, 1919. 


The committee of the American Council on Education did not carry 
out its plan to present a measure of its own, providing for the creation 
of a Department of Education, although it drafted such a bill. It 
judged, however, that the purposes which the Council sought could 
be achieved by friendly conferences with the N. E. A. Commission 
and by later modifications of the commission’s bill, if that turned out 
to be desirable. It did not agree with the N. E. A. Commission as 
to the need of large Federal appropriations and in certain other respects 
it did not approve of the bill which the commission eventually pre- 
pared. It took no definite steps during 1919 to bring this bill and the 
principles involved to the attention of the membership of the Council. 
In the last few months, however, the legislative situation has developed. 
Not only has the Smith-Towner bill received the endorsement of many 
educational and civic organizations, but there are now pending several 
other educational measures embodying similar principles of Govern- 
ment support and control of education—some of them are in effect 
fractional parts of the Smith-Towner bill. One or another of them 


2 


may pass in the near future. The amount of support now being 
brought behind the Smith-Towner bill may also force the considera- 
tion of that measure at the next session of Congress. The Committee 
on Federal Legislation of the American Council on Education there- 
fore judges that the time has come to lay the whole matter before the 
constituent members of the Council and before the university public 
in order that the committee may truly represent the views of the Coun- 
cil’s membership if called upon to appear before committees of Con- 
gress. That is the purpose of this referendum. ‘The points upon 
which the Committee especially desires to be instructed are taken up 
below in the order in which they appear on the ballot. 


A FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. 


(Ballot, Question No. 1: ‘Is the creation of a Department of 
Education with a Secretary in the President’s Cabinet endorsed” ?) 


ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR. 


The principal arguments in favor of the creation of a Federal De- 
partment of Education have already been referred to. In addition, 
it may be briefly pointed out that such a Department is expected to 
carry on extensive investigations of the educational needs of the nation 
and of all questions relating to education. It would be charged with 
promoting educational relationships between the United States and for- 
eign countries. From its accumulation of exact information and by 
reason of the distinguished personnel which could be drawn to it (but 
which cannot be attracted to a subordinate bureau), it would assume 
leadership in developing American education. Moreover, both the in- 
terests of education and the interests of the country as a whole demand 
that education be taken into account in establishing the general public 
policies of the nation. This would be assured by the presence of a 
Secretary speaking for education in the President’s Cabinet. The pres- 
tige of education would also be greatly enhanced. 


ARGUMENTS AGAINST. 


The principal argument against the creation of a Department of 
Education is the fear of Federal domination of the educational affairs 
of the country. Many believe that this will inevitably follow the step 
toward centralization which the department represents. It is also ob- 
jected that the creation of a Department headed by a Secretary im- 
mediately involves education with politics. Cabinet officers are almost 
invariably chosen from the party in power. There would be a Demo- 
cratic Secretary under a Democratic administration and a Republican 
Secretary under a Republican administration. There should be, how- 
ever, no political or partisan aspects of education. The change of the 
highest educational officer of the country to conform to the political 
color of any given administration would tend to create in the popular 
mind a false impression of the relation of education to politics. 

Strong opposition to a Departmnet of Education is looked for from 
existing governmental offices now scattered through various depart- 


5) 


ments. Many of these would expect to have their privileges diminished 
if they were transferred to anew Department of Education. The work 
of others is so intimately bound up with the work of the departments 
in which they are now located that the transfer of them to a new depart- 
ment is regarded as disastrous. This is particularly the case with the 
educational enterprises in the Department of Agriculture. It should 
be noted, however, that no suggestion of change or consolidation or 
re-arrangement in the government service generally meets with the 
favor of the offices affected. 

Those who oppose the creation of a Department of Education offer 
certain counter proposals. Perhaps the most widely discussed of these 
—and the most plausible—is a proposal for a Federal Board of Educa- 
tion to be appointed by the President from the country at large. The 
Board would elect an executive officer—with the title of Commissioner, 
or Superintendent or Director—who would have charge of the opera- 
tions of the Board, who would be wholly removed from political pres- 
sure and would hold office on good behavior. The advocates of this 
type of Federal organization make much of the analogy between it and 
the organization which has proved effective in states and cities. (It 
may be pointed out that the analogy would be complete only if the tasks 
of the Federal Board were primarily administrative ones. ) 

Another counter-proposal is for a National University. This is 
based on a totally different conception of the task of the Federal edu- 
cational office. The advocates of the National University idea con- 
ceive the educational and scientific functions of the government as 
being the solution of important national problems. The solution can 
be best advanced by assembling the most distinguished experts and set- 
ting them at the task. A National University conceived as a great 
problem solving center would furnish the best focus for this expert 
service. The question of the administration of subsidies or of any 
body of substantive law does not enter into the plan of the National 
University as outlined here. 

Still another proposal is the creation of a Department of Education 
and Science that would bring together in a single department all those 
offices of the Government which are concerned with scientific investi- 
gation and the dissemination of knowledge, but which administer no 
body of substantive law. Offices of existing departments that com- 
bine the two functions of investigation and the administration of a 
body of law (as, for example, the States Relations Service of the De- 
partment of Agriculture) would be left in those departments in which 
they are now located. 


FEDERAL AID. 


(Ballot Question No. 2: “Is the principle of Federal aid to educa- 
tion in the states on the condition that the states match the Federal 
appropriations endorsed ?”) 


ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR. 


The principal argument in favor of Federal aid for education is as 
follows: Citizens are citizens not only of states or local communities 
but citizens of the nation. It is a matter of vital importance to the 


4 


nation that all of its citizens should be as intelligent as possible and 
capable of discharging to the full the duties of citizens. Moreover in 
a democracy which is based on the theory of equality of opportunity 
the nation is under obligations to see that opportunities in all its com- 
munities are substantially equal. It is therefore reasonable to tax all 
the wealth of the country in order to equalize educational opportunities 
in all of its parts. There must be Federal support of education, fur- 
thermore, if educational opportunities are to be equalized. The schools 
in rural and village communities can only be strengthened thru the 
expenditure of funds much greater than these communities themselves 
can raise. ‘General state taxation has already proven itself inadequate 
to a solution of the problem on a national scale. The welfare of the 
nation itself is more intimately bound up with the intelligence of that 
majority of its children now enrolled in the rural and village schools 
than any other single factor. Federal co-operation in the support and 
development of rural education is clearly the only solution of the prob- 
lem.” 

The condition that states must appropriate an equal amount of money 
in order to receive Federal aid is defended on the ground and that by 
this means local responsibility is preserved and the smaller divisions 
of the nation are compelled to make a reasonable provision for educa- 


tion. 
ARGUMENTS AGAINST. 


Those opposed to the provisions for Federal aid contained in the 
Smith-Towner Bill, the Kenyon Bill and other similar measures, for 
the most part object both to Federal subsidies and to the principle of 
dollar for dollar appropriations. The following are the principal rea- 
sons for their opposition. 

Bureaucratic control is the almost inevitable consequence of large 
Federal subsidies devoted to any kind of undertaking. However care- 
fully the appropriating act may be drawn to preserve local autonomy 
and prevent undue Federal influence there is finally in the hands of 
the Federal office administering the subsidies great coercive power. The 
present form of the Smith-Towner Bill states: “That all educational 
facilities encouraged by the provisions of this act and accepted by a 
state shall be organized, supervised and administered exclusively by 
the legally constituted state and local educational authorities of said 
state, and the Secretary of Education shall exercise no authority in 
relation thereto except as herein provided to insure that all funds ap- 
portioned to said state shall be used for the purposes for which they 
are appropriated, and in accordance with the provisions of this act 
accepted by said state’. In spite of this disclaimer opponents of Federal 
subsidies believe that the department still has complete power to mold 
the policies of the states as it chooses in that it is authorized to decide 
whether the plans submitted by any state are acceptable. It is be- 
lieved that the tendency will gradually be in the direction of a larger 
measure of Federal dictation and control. 

The preparation of records and reports in connection with the dis- 
bursement of large subsidies becomes an enormous routine clerical un- 
dertaking. A certain type of office is developed, of which there are a 
large number already in Washington. The work of such an office is 


5 


the more or less mechanical administration of a routine task. The 
opponents of Federal aid believe that the Federal education office should 
not be of this type. The Federal education office, whether it be a de- 
partment or an agency of less official prestige, should be primarily a 
source of ideas and information. It should exert its leadership in the 
country by means of ideas. It should therefore be a scientific office 
devoted to the performance of expert tasks. The dispensation of sub- 
sidies with the accompanying friction and large dead-weight clerical 
staff would seriously diminish the inspirational influence of the de- 
partment. Without desiring to make invidious comparisons, it is clear 
that the experience of the country with the existing governmental 
agencies for education bears out these contentions. For example the 
undertakings of the Bureau of Education differ fundamentally from 
those of the Federal Board for Vocational Education and the States 
Relation Service of the Department of Agriculture. 

The opponents of Federal subsidies take sharp issue with the ad- 
vocates on the question of the necessity for such subsidies. The op- 
ponents maintain that states are entirely able to provide all necessary 
support for education within their boundaries. Those that have not 
yet made adequate provisions will do so if their deficiencies are pointed 
out by an authority which all respect. A Federal education office ade- 
quately equipped to investigate educational conditions throughout the 
country, to point out existing defects and recommend improvements 
would accomplish everything that is sought by large Federal appropria- 
tions. The result would also be more wholesome in that the states 
would have taken measures for their own improvement rather than 
have had improvement thrust upon them. 

The opponents of the special type of Federal subsidy provided in the 
Smith-Towner Bill, the Kenyon Bill and others, believe that the dollar 
for dollar appropriations are in principle not far removed from bribery. 
The motive appealed to is a low one. States are induced to give money 
to education, not because it is the proper thing to do, but in order that 
they may get their share of a Federal fund. Moreover the device is 
on trial. In the field of education it has been in operation for a little 
more than five years. It has caused endless friction in some quarters. 
Up to date it has been a very dubious success. 

Two economic arguments are also urged against large Federal sub- 
sidies : 

(1) The determination of the purpose for which the money should 
be spent is too far removed from the people who are taxed for the 
expenditure. i 

(2) Large Federal appropriations are particularly inopportune at 
the present time because they tend to increase the high cost of living. 
“Every hundred millions spent by the Federal Government under pres- 
ent tax or loan conditions is mostly taken out of capital and mostly 
added to personal expenditure. The addition to personal expenditure 
means an increased money demand for products. The diminished capi- 
tal means a diminished supply of means of production. Thus the price 
disturbance, already bad enough, is accentuated at both ends. The bad 
effect of the proposed measure taken by itself in putting up prices of 
goods beyond their present high figure would be greater than anything 
it would do for teachers salaries”. 


6 


(Ballot Question No. 3: Should a Department of Education sup- 
ervise the expenditure of Federal appropriations of the states?)* 


A certain inconsistency exists in the Smith-Towner bill with respect 
to the supervisory functions of the Federal government. The bill 
states, in Section 14: “That all the educational facilities encouraged 
by the provisions of this act and accepted by a state shall be organized, 
supervised and administered exclusively by the legally constituted state 
and local educational authorities of said state, and the Secretary of 
Education shall exercise no authority in relation thereto except as 
herein provided to insure that all funds apportioned t6 said state shall 
be used for the purposes for which they are appropriated and in ac- 
cordance with the provisions of this act accepted by the state’. If 
the Federal Board for Vocational Education is included in the De- 
partment of Education by direction of the President on the passage of 
the act, there will be a discrepancy between the procedure of the De- 
partment as specified in the clause quoted above and that already 
represented in the established practice of the Federal Board. The edu- 
cational interests of the country should determine which procedure 
meets with their approval. It may be pointed out that the section quoted 
was introduced late into the Smith-Towner Bill in response to the 
representations of influential state school officials. A provision of 
this sort appeared to be necessary in order to safeguard the local auton- 
omy of the states. 

On the other hand the advocates of the degree of supervision pro- 
vided in the Smith-Hughes Act maintain that there is a solemn obli- 
gation on the part of the state accepting Federal money to use the 
money in conformity with the requirements of the law making the ap- 
propriation. Without a thorough-going organization and careful safe- 
guards it is not possible to make sure that the Federal money is being 
spent effectively for the purposes intended. In general it may be 
stated that somewhat strict supervision is inevitably bound up with 


large Federal appropriations. 

*A certain amount of supervision is exercised by the Federal Board for Vo- 
cational Education. The Smith-Hughes Act states: ‘That the Federal 
Board for Vocational Education shall annually ascertain whether the sev- 
eral states are using or are prepared to use the money received by them 
in accordance with the provisions of this act”. The Board determines this 
in part by inspections. 


(Ballot Question No. 4: Should the Department of Education be 
authorized to determine acceptable standards for various types of 
institutions, to inspect institutions within the states and to publish 
its findings?) 


The power to establish standards would unquestionably be the most 
influential prerogative of a Department of Education. Under the 
Smith-Towner Bill the Department is implicitly given this power. 
Through its ability to withhold appropriations unless state plans meet 
with its approval the Department can establish minimum standards in 
some of the principal fields of educational effort. It is this implied 
power to coerce through shutting off supplies that constitutes in the 
minds of critics of the bill one of its principal dangers. Standards for- 


7 


mulated in the serene seclusion of Washington may be imposed without 
debate or appeal upon institutions in all parts of the United States. 
Nothing is more likely to foster bureautocratic tendencies. i 

Nevehtheless it is generally admitted that a national standardizing 
agency is needed. Those who distrust the influence of large Federal 
grants still believe that the Government’s principal education office 
should be in a position to establish minimum standards. A Depart- 
ment well equipped for investigation and authorized by law to conduct 
investigations of schools in any part of the United States would need 
no further coercive powers to establish effective standards. The ex- 
perience of the Carnegie Foundation, the Council on Medical Educa- 
tion and the Bureau of Education has shown that full publicity given 
to the investigations of a non-partisan agency is sufficient. 


THE SMITH-TOWNER BILL UNAMENDED. 


(Ballot Question No. 5: Is the Smith-Towner bill endorsed with- 
out amendments?) 


The major issues involved in the Smith-Towner bill have already 
been outlined. Specific amendments are discussed below. 


AMENDMENTS TO SMITH-TOWNER BILL. 


(Ballot Question No. 6: Is an amendment of the Smith-Towner 
bill to provide for the inclusion in the Department of Education of 
the Federal Board for Vocational Education favored?) 


ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR. 


One of the principal ends sought in the measure for a Department 
of Education is the consolidation of the Government’s educational of- 
fices and undertakings. In spite of this expressed purpose the Smith- 
Towner bill does not formally bring together the two principal educa- 
tion offices of the government. It is generally admitted that the effect 
of the attempt to separate vocational education from general education 
in states and in cities has been disastrous to both. Few reliable educa- 
tors now believe that vocational education should be administered as 
a separate enterprise. It has been peculiarly unfortunate that the ma- 
chinery set up by the Federal Government for the promotion of voca- 
tional education should have had no organic connection with the rest 
of the Government’s educational efforts. If anew Department of Edu- 
cation did not include at the outset the work of the Federal Board the 
Department would be lop-sided. The existence of separate organisms 
to handle this important aspect of education would also tend to per- 
petuate and increase the confusion already existing in the educational 
field because of the necessity of dealing with a plurality of Government 
agencies. . | 


ARGUMENTS AGAINST. 


The principal argument against the designation of the Federal Board 
for Vocational Education as one of the offices to be included in the 


8 


Department of Education is that of expediency. Many influential 
members of Congress believe in preserving the autonomy of the Federal 
Board. At the time that the Smith-Towner bill was framed the of- 
ficers of the Board also did not favor incorporation in the proposed 
department. It was felt that the bill would have a better chance of 
passage if the inclusion of the Federal Board was not specified. Advo- 
cates of the bill pointed out also that the decision is placed in the 
hands of the President and that if he sees fit the Federal Board may 
be added to the Department immediately upon its creation. 


Ballot Question No. 7: Is an amendment of the Smith-Towner 
bill to eliminate the proposed appropriations for co-operation with 
the states and to provide for an investigation and report by the De- 
partment of Education on the distribution of Federal aid and the 
amounts needed for specific purposes favored?) 


ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR. 


The opponents of Federal aid to education and those who are skep- 
tical about the necessity of large Federal appropriations will doubtless 
endorse a measure containing a provision such as is indicated in the 
question stated above. The Government has already made various 
experiments in granting aid to education. The important acts are the 
first and second Morrill Acts, under date of 1862 and 1890, respectively, 
the Hatch Act of 1887, the Smith-Lever Act of 1914, and the Smith- 
Hughes Act of 1917. The first Morrill Act merely granted land to 
the states for the establishment of colleges of agriculture and mechanic 
arts. The second Morrill Act provided an annual appropriation for 
the maintenance of these colleges with only the most general specifica- 
tions as to the purposes for which the money should be expended. The 
Hatch Act established agricultural experiment stations and provided for 
their support by annual Federal appropriation. The direction of the 
stations and the approval of their projects were placed in the hands of 
the Department of Agriculture. The Smith-Lever Act provided large 
continuing annual appropriations for the support of extension teaching 
and demonstration in agriculture and home economics on condition 
that the states should appropriate amounts equal to the sums received 
by them from the Federal government. The whole undertaking is 
directed from Washington. The Smith-Hughes Act provided for an- 
nual appropriations for the development of vocational education on 
condition that the Federal money is matched by money raised by or 
in the states. It specifies in detail how the sums should be spent and 
locates in the Federal Board for Vocational Education authority to 
approve plans and establish standards. The experience of the United 
States with Federal aid of one kind or another covers a period of nearly 
sixty years. The experience is long enough to furnish a basis for rea- 
sonably sound conclusions as to the effect of Federal aid and the type 
of Federal aid likely to prove most stimulating. As far as is known 
the result of this experience has never influenced new legislation ex- 
cept in the most superficial way. The question is one of such serious 
moment to the whole future educational development of the United 
States that it should be studied carefully. No large new provisions for 


9 


Federal aid should be made except on the basis of a matured theory. 
A long and careful investigation must precede the formation of such a 
theory. This is an appropriate task for a Department of Education. 
It represents the determination of a policy of statesmanship. 

Opponents of the Federal aid provisions in the Smith-Towner bill 
likewise urge that the sum of one hundred million dollars is a thor- 
oughly arbitrary sum. No reliable data are at hand to indicate that 
just this amount is needed to accomplish the purposes specified in the 
bill. Its very roundness indicates that it is a guess. The division of 
it also into so many fortieths, twentieths and tenths for specific pur- 
poses is also based on rough estimates. Assuming that the Federal Gov- 
ernment should grant aid in large amounts for education in the states 
it would be far better to determine in advance the actual needs of each 
phase of education to be subsidized. Such an approach to the subject 
must especially commend itself to scientifically trained persons. 


ARGUMENTS AGAINST. 


The defendants of this portion of the Smith-Towner bill maintain 
that the necessity for Federal assistance is immediate. Several years 
delay would result in irreparable losses in the development of the 
whole country during this critical period. Admitting that the hundred 
million dollars is a round sum, they point out that it is certainly too 
small rather than too large and that it is highly desirable to secure so 
much at once and get started. They also point to the difficulties of 
the executive departments in securing large appropriations on repre- 
sentation of the needs of the interests to which the departments cater. 
They regard it as wholly improbable that Congress would make large 
provision for Federal aid to be spent by a Department of Education 
two or three years after the establishment of the Department on recom- 
mendation of the Department itself. If, however, the Department al- 
ready has a large continuing appropriation it will be relatively easy to 
secure additions to this sum as they may be needed from time to time. 

In general defense of Federal aid it is pointed out that the principle 
has long ‘ago been accepted that the money raised by taxing a whole 
state may properly be spent to equalize the educational opportunities 
throughout the state. Wiaithout such assistance small localities could 
not support adequate educational institutions. If the principle applies 
to the state as a political unit, logically it should apply to the nation. 


(Ballot Question No. 8: Is an amendment of the Smith-Towner 
bill to provide for the appointment by the Department of Education 
of an advisory council representing non-offfficial educational opinion 
favored?) 


ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR. 


Whether the Department of Education be established primarily as 
an investigating and co-ordinating agency or as a distributor of Federal 
funds its vitality will largely depend upon the closeness of its contact 
with the best minds among the educational public. Some of the most 
valuable experiences of the war were the examples of co-operation 


10 


between Federal offices and leading citizens. In any event the De- 
partment of Education should be the focus and center of dynamic ideas. 
Government departments can never maintain a monapoly of ideas. To 
avoid stagnation they must constantly seek ideas at their sources. The 
provision in the Act itself for the creation of an advisory council 
would go a long way toward keeping the department in contact with 
the best thought of the country and save it from bureaucratic ten- 
dencies. Provisions for the appointment of such advisory councils ap- 
pear in several other measures now before Congress. 


(Ballot Question No. 9: Is the Kenyon bill endorsed?) 


The Kenyon Bill for Americanization appropriates $6,500,000 for 
the education of illiterates and other persons not able to read or write 
English. $336,100 of this amount is deducted for investigation and 
administration. The remainder is to be~allotted by the Secretary of 
the Interior to the states in the ratio in which the number of resident 
illiterate and other persons unable to understand, speak, read or write 
the English language, sixteen years of age and over, bears to the num- 
ber of resident illiterates and other persons unable to understand, speak, 
read or write the English language, sixteen years of age and over, 
within the United States. To receive the benefits of the Act each 
state must appropriate an amount of money equal to that received by 
it from the Federal government. It must require all illiterates and non- 
English speaking aliens to attend classes for two hundred hours a 
year, until they have completed a specified course approved by the 
Secretary of the Interior. State plans and regulations for the carry- 
ing out of the purposes of the Act must be approved by the Secretary 
of the Interior. The administrative agent for the Secretary of the 
Interior is the Bureau of Education. 


ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR. 


The Kenyon bill originally contained that portion of the Smith- 
Towner bill which relates to the eradication of illiteracy and the train- 
ing of foreigners in the English language. It was felt that these con- 
stituted the two must urgent educational demands made upon the Na- 
tional Government. States had already failed to eradicate illiteracy or 
to provide adequately for the Americanization of the foreign popula- 
tion. It had therefore become a national obligation. Without wait- 
ing for the creation of a Department of Education it was desirable 
to assign this task to the Government’s principal education office—the 
Bureau of Education in the Department of the Interior. 


ARGUMENTS AGAINST. 


The opponents of the Kenyon bill while admitting the desirability of 
Americanizing aliens and eradicating illiteracy, strenuously object to 
the modus operandi prescribed by the Kenyon bill. More than any 
other educational measure, this one places full control of this large 
national undertaking in the hands of a Washington department. The 
Secretary of the Interior through the Bureau of Education is charged 
with formulating the courses of study to be used throughout the states, 


iia 


LTRRARY ot an 
UNIVERSITY OF LLINOLS 


with approval of state plans, with prescribing standards and with 
supervision. He is authorized to withhold appropriations if local ar- 
rangements are not satisfactory to him. It is not the leadership of an 
office equipped to investigate the subject and bring to bear upon it 
the best thought in the country that is provided for, but rather a 
scheme of bureaucratic domination. While the amount of money in- 
volved in the Kenyon bill is small, the principle is judged by its op- 
ponents to be dangerous in the extreme. 

It will be observed that other features of the bill correspond to 
certain features of the Smith-Towner bill concerning which argu- 


ments pro and con have already been presented. 
Footnote—For a discussion of other educational bills before Congress, see 
the Educational Record, Nos. 1 and 2. 


12 


THE SMITH-TOWNER BILL 


To create a Department of Education, to authorize appropriations for the 
conduct of said Department, to authorize the appropriation of money 
to encourage the States in the promotion and support of. education, 
and for other purposes. 


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That there is hereby created an 
executive department in the Government to be called the Department of 
Education, with a Secretary of Education, who shall be the head thereof, 
to be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of 
the Senate, and who shall receive a salary of $12,000 per annum, and whose 
tenure of office shall be the same as that of the heads of other executive 
departments; and section one hundred and fifty-eight of the Revised Statutes 
is hereby amended to include such department, and the provisions of title 
4 of the Revised Statutes, including all amendments thereto, are hereby 
made applicable to said department. The Secretary of Education shall cause 
a seal of office to be made for such department of such device as the Presi- 
dent shall approve, and judicial notice shall be taken of said seal. 

Sec. 2. That there shall be in said department an Assistant Secretary of 
Education to be appointed by the President, who shall receive a salary 
of $5,000 per annum. He shall perform such duties as may be prescribed 
by the Secretary or required by law. There shall also be one chief clerk 
and a disbursing clerk and such chiefs of bureaus and clerical assistants as 
may from time to time be authorized by Congress. 

Sec. 3. That there is hereby transferred to the Department of Education 
the Bureau of Education, and the President is authorized and empowered 
in his discretion to transfer to the Department of Education such offices, 
bureaus, divisions, boards or branches of the Government, connected with 
or attached to any of the executive departments or organized independently 
of any department, as in his judgment should be controlled by, or the func- 
tions of which should be exercised by, the Department of Education, and 
all such offices, bureaus, divisions, boards or branches of the Government 
so transferred by the President or by Act of Congress, shall thereafter be 
administered by the Department of Education, as hereinafter provided. 

All officers, clerks, and employees employed in or by any office, bureau, 

division, board or branch of the Government, transferred in accordance with 
the provisions of this Act to the Department of Education, shall each and 
all be transferred to said Department of Education at their existing grades 
and salaries, except where otherwise provided in this Act; and the office 
records and papers on file and pertaining exclusively to the business of any 
such office, bureau, division, board or branch of the Government so trans- 
ferred, together with the furniture and equipment thereof, shall be trans- 
ferred to said department. 
_ Sec. 4. That the Secretary of Education shall have charge, in the build- 
ings or premises occupied by or assigned to the Department of Education, 
of the library, furniture, fixtures, records and other property used therein 
or pertaining thereto, and may expend for rental of appropriate quarters 
for the accommodation of the Department of Education within the District 
of Columbia, and for the library, furniture, equipment and all other inci- 
dental expenses, such sums as Congress may provide from time to time. 

All power and authority conferred by law upon or exercised by the head 
of any executive department, or by any administrative board, over any 
officer, office, bureau, division, board or branch of the Government, trans- 
ferred in accordance with the provisions of this Act to the Department 
of Education, and any and all business arising therefrom or pertaining 
thereto, and all duties performed in connection therewith, shall, after such 
transfer, be vested in and exercised by the Secretary of Education. 


13 


All laws prscribing the work and defining the duties and powers of the 
several offices, bureaus, divisions, boards or branches of the Government, 
transferred in accordance with the provisions of this Act to the Depart- 
ment of Education, shall, in so far as the same are not in conflict with 
the provisions of this Act, remain in full force and effect and be executed 
by the Secretary of Education, to whom is hereby granted definite authority 
to reorganize the work of any and all of the said offices, bureaus, divisions, 
boards or branches of the Government so transferred, in such way as will 
in his judgment best accomplish the purposes of this "Act. 

Sec. 5. That it shall be the duty of the Department of Education to con- 
duct studies and investigations in the field of education and to report thereon. 
Research shall be undertaken in (a) illiteracy; (b) immigrant education; 
(c) public-school education, and especially rural education; (d) physical 
education, including health education, recreation and sanitation; (e) prepa- 
ration and supply of competent teachers for the public schools; and (f) 
in such other fields as, in the judgment of the Secretary of Education, may 
require attention and study. 

In order to carry out the provisions of this section the Secretary of Edu- 
cation is authorized, in the same manner as provided for appointments in 
other departments, to make appointments, or recommendations of appoint- 
ments, of educational attaches to foreign embassies, and of such investi- 
gators and representatives as may be needed, subject to the appropriations 
that have been made or may hereafter be made to any office, bureau, division, 
board or branch of the Government, transferred in accordance with the 
provisions of this Act to the Department of Education; and where appro- 
priations have not been made therefor the appropriation provided in section 
six of this Act shall be available. 

Sec. 6. That for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1921, and annually there- 
after, the sum of $500,000 is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of 
any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to the Department 
of Education, for the purpose of paying salaries and conducting investiga- 
tions and paying all incidental and traveling expenses and rent where neces- 
sary, and for the purpose of enabling the Department of Education to carry 
out the provisions of this Act. And all appropriations which have been 
made and which may hereafter be made to any office, bureau, division, 
board, or branch of the Government, transferred in accordance with the 
provisions of this Act to the Department of Education, are hereby con- 
tinued in full force and effect, and shall be administered by the Secretary 
of Education in such manner as is prescribed by law. 

Sec. 7. That in order to encourage the States in the promotion and sup- 
port of education, there is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any 
money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year end- 
ing June 30, 1921, and annually thereafter, $100,000,000, to be apportioned, 
disbursed, and expended as hereinafter provided. 

Sec. 8. That in order to encourage the States to remove illiteracy, three- 
fortieths of the sum authorized to be appropriated by section 7 of this Act 
shall be used for the instruction of illiterates ten years of age and over. 
Such instruction shall deal with the common-school branches and the duties 
of citizenship, and when advisable shall prepare for some definite occupa- 
tion. Said sum shall be apportioned to the States in the proportions which 
their respective illiterate populations of ten years of age and over, not in- 
cluding foreign-born illiterates, bear to such total illiterate population of 
the United States, not including outlying possessions, according to the last 
preceding census of the United States. 


Sec. 9. That in order to encourage the States in the Americanization of 
immigrants, three-fortieths of the sum authorized to be appropriated by 
section 7 of this Act shall be used to teach immigrants ten years of age 
and over, to speak and read the English language and to understand and 
appreciate the spirit and purpose of the American Government and the 
duties of citizenship in a free country. The said sum shall be apportioned 
to the States in the proportions which their respective foreign-born popu- 
lations bear to the total foreign-born population of the United States, not 
including outlying possessions, according to the last preceding census of 
the United States. 


14 


\ 


Sec. 10. That in order to encourage the States to equalize educational 
opportunities, five-tenths of the sum authorized to be appropriated by sec- 
tion 7 of this Act shall be used in public elementary and secondary schools 
for the partial payment for teachers’ salaries, for providing better instruc- 
tion and extending school terms, especially in rural schools and schools 
in sparsely settled localities, and otherwise providing equally good educa- 
tional opportunities for the children in the several States, and for the ex- 
tension and adaptation of public libraries for educational purposes. The 
said sum shall be apportioned to the States, one-half in the proportions 
which the number of children between the ages of six and twenty-one of 
the respective States bear to the total number of such children in the United 
States, and one-half in the proportions which the number of public-school 
teachers employed in teaching positions in the respective States bear to the 
total number of public-school teachers so employed in the United States, 
not including outlying possessions, said apportionment to be based upon 
statistics collected annually by the Department of Education. 

Provided, however, That in order to share in the apportionment provided 
by this section a State shall establish and maintain the following require- 
ments unless prevented by constitutional limitations, in which case these 
requirements shall be approximated as nearly as constitutional provisions 
will permit: (a) a legal school term of at least twenty-four weeks in each 
year for the benefit of all children of school age in such State; (b) a com- 
pulsory school attendance law requiring all children between the ages of 
seven and fourteen to attend some school for at least twenty-four weeks 
in each year; (c) a law requiring that the English language shall be the 
basic language of instruction in the common-school branches in all schools, 
public and private. 

Sec. 11. That in order to encourage the States in the promotion of physical 
education, two-tenths of the sum authorized to be appropriated by section 7 of 
this act shall be used for physical education and instruction in the principles 
of health and sanitation, and for providing school nurses, school dental clinics, 
and otherwise promoting physical and mental welfare. The said sum shall be 
apportioned to the States in the proportions which their respective popula- 
tions bear to the total population of the United States, not including outlying 
possessions, according to the last preceding census of the United States. 

Sec. 12. That in order to encourage the States in the preparation of teach- 
ers for public-school service, particularly in rural schools, three-twentieths 
of the sum authorized to be appropriated by section 7 of this Act shall be 
used to provide and extend facilities for the improvement of teachers already 
in service and for the more adequate preparation of prospective teachers, 
and to provide an increased number of trained and competent teachers by 
encouraging, through the establishment of scholarships and otherwise, a 
greater number of talented young people to make adequate preparation for 
public-school service. The said sum shall be apportioned to the States in the 
proportions which the number of public-school teachers employed in teaching 
positions in the respective State bear to the total number of public-school 
teachers so employed in the United States, not including outlying possessions, 
said apportionments to be based on statistics collected annually by the De- 
partment of Education. 

Sec. 13. That in order to secure the benefits of the appropriation author- 
ized in section 7, and of any of the apportionments made in sections 8, 9, 10, 
11, and 12 of this Act, a State shall by legislative enactment accept the pro- 
visions of this Act and provide for the distribution of such funds as may 
be apportioned to said State, and shall designate the State’s chief educational 
authority, whether a State superintendent of public instruction, a commis- 
sioner of education, a State board of education, or other legally constituted 
chief educational authority, to represent said State in the administration of 
this Act, and such authority so designated shall be recognized by the Secre- 
tary of Education: Provided, That in any State in which the legislature does 
not meet in 1920, the governor of said State, in so far as he may have au- 
thority so to do, may take such action, temporarily, as is herein provided to 
be taken by legislative enactment in order to secure the benefits of this Act, 
and such action by the governor shall be recognized by the Secretary of 
Education for the purposes of this Act, when reported by the chief educa- 


15 


tional authority designated to represent said State, until the legislature of said 
State shall have met in due course and been in session sixty days. 

In any State accepting the provisions of this Act, the State treasurer shall 
be designated and appointed as custodian of all funds received by said State 
as apportionments under the provisions of this Act, to receive and provide 
for the proper custody and disbursement of the same, such disbursements 
to be made in accordance with the legal provisions of said State, on war- 
rants duly drawn by the State’s chief educational authority designated to 
represent said State in the administration of this Act. 


A State may accept the provisions of any one or more of the respective 
apportionments authorized in sections 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 of this Act, and 
may defer the acceptance of any one or more of said apportionments: FPro- 
vided, however, That no money shall be apportioned to any State from any 
of the funds provided in sections 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 of this Act, unless a 
sum equally as large shall be provided by said State, or by local authorities, 
or by both, for the same purpose: And provided, That the sum or sums 
provided by a State for the equalization of educational opportunities, for 
the promotion of physical education and for the preparation of teachers, 
shall not be less for any year than the amount provided for the same pur- 
pose for the fiscal year next preceding the acceptance of the provisions of 
this Act by said State: And provided further, That no money apportioned 
to any State under the provisions of this Act shall be used by any State or 
local authority, directly or indirectly, for the purchase, rental, erection, 
preservation, or repair of any building or equipment, or for the purchase 
or rental of land, or for the payment of debts or the interest thereon. 

Sec. 14. That when a State shall have accepted the provisions of this 
Act and shall have provided for the distribution and administration of such 
funds as may be apportioned to said State, as herein provided, the State’s 
chief educational authority designated to represent said State shall so report 
in writing to the Secretary of Education. If such report shows that said 
State is prepared to carry out the provisions of this Act with respect to any 
one or more of the apportionments authorized in sections 8, 9, 10, 11, and 
12 of this Act, the Secretary of Education shall apportion to said State 
for the fiscal year, or for the remainder of the fiscal year, as the case may 
be, such funds as said State may be entitled to receive under the provisions 
of this Act, and shall certify such apportionment or apportionments to the 
Secretary of the Treasury: Provided, That this Act shall not be construed 
to require uniformity of plans, means, or methods in the several States in 
order to secure the benefits herein provided, except as specifically stated 
herein: And provided further, That all the educational facilities encouraged 
by the provisions of this Act and accepted by a State shall be organized, 
supervised, and administered exclusively by the legally constituted State and 
local educational authorities of said State, and the Secretary of Education 
shall exercise no authority in relation thereto except as herein provided 
to insure that all funds apportioned to said State shall be used for the pur- 

ses for which they are appropriated, and in accordance with the pro- 

isions of this Act accepted by said State. 

Sec. 15. That the Secretary of Education is authorized to prescribe plans 
for keeping accounts of the expenditures of such funds as may be appor- 
tioned to the States under the provisions of this Act, and to audit such ac- 
counts. The Secretary of Education may withhold the apportionment or 
apportionments of any State for the ensuing fiscal year whenever he shall 
determine that such apportionment or apportionments made to said State 
for the current fiscal year are not being expended in accordance with the 
provisions of this Act: Provided, however, That before withholding any 
such apportionment from any State, as herein provided, the Secretary of 
Education shall give due notice in writing to the chief educational authority 
designated to represent said State, stating specifically wherein said State 
fails to comply with the provisions of this Act. 

If any portion of the money received by the treasurer of a State under 
the provisions of this Act for any of the purposes herein provided shall, 
by action or contingency, be diminished or lost, the same shall be replaced 
by said State, and until so replaced no subsequent apportionment for such 
purpose shall be paid to said State. If any part of the funds apportioned 


16 


annually to any State for any of the purposes named in sections 8, 9, 10, 11, 
and 12 of this Act has not been expended for such purpose, a sum equal 
to such unexpended part shall be deducted from the next succeeding annual 
apportionment made to said State for such purpose. 

Sec. 16. That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and 
directed to pay quarterly, on the lst day of July, October, January, and 
April, to the treasury of any State designated to receive such funds, such 
apportionment or apportionments as are properly certified to him by the 
Secretary of Education, and he shall discontinue such payments when noti- 
fied so to do by the Secretary of Education, as provided in this Act. 

Sec. 17. That the chief educational authority designated to represent 
any State receiving the benefits of this Act, shall, not later than Septem- 
ber 1 of each year, make a report to the Secretary of Education showing 
the work done in said State in carrying out the provisions of this Act, and 
the receipts and expenditures of money apportioned to said State under 
the provisions of this Act. If the chief educational authority designated 
to represent any State shall fail to report as herein provided, the Secretary 
of Education shall notify the Secretary of the Treasury to discontinue the 
payment of all apportionments to said State until such report shall have 
been made. 

Sec. 18. That the Secretary of Education shall annually at the close of 
each fiscal year make a report in writing to Congress giving an account 
of all moneys received and disbursed by the Department of Education, 
and discribing the work done by the department. He shall also, not 
later than December 1 of each year, make a report to Congress 
Gierieeacministration so, sections) 7.) o) 09,010) Ll 12 v3, a IS 9) 16 and 
17 of this Act, and shall include in said report a summary of the reports 
made to him by the several States showing the condition of public educa- 
tion therein, and shall at the same time make such recommendations to 
Congress as will, in his judgment, improve public education in the United 
States. He shall also from time to time make such special investigations 
and reports as may be required of him by the President or by Congress. 

Sec. 19. That this act shall take effect April 1, 1920, and all Acts and 
parts of Acts in conflict with this Act are hereby repealed. 


17 


THE KENYON BILL 


To promote Americanization by providing for cooperation with the sev- 
eral States in the education of non-English-speaking persons and the as- 
similation of foreign-born residents, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Secretary of the In- 
terior, through the Bureau of Education, is hereby authorized and directed 
to cooperate with the several States in the education of illiterates or other 
persons unable to understand, speak, read, or write the English language 
and with the Territories and possessions of the United States, except the 
Philippine Islands, in the education of illiterates. 

Sec. 2. That for the purpose of cooperating with the several State in 
the education of illiterates or other persons unable to understand, speak, 
read, or write the English language there is hereby appropriated, out of 
any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year 
ending June 30, 1921, $6,500,000. 

Sec. 3. That of the amount appropriated by section 2 above, $336,100 
may be deducted and used for the following purposes: 

Administrative officers, specialists, and field officers in Washington, Dis- 
trict of Columbia—one at $5,000, four at $4,000 each, three at $3,500 each, 
five at $3,000 each, four at $2,750 each, five at $2,500 each; total, $70,000. 

Clerks, stenographers, and messengers in Washington, District of Colum- 
bia—one at $2,000, three at $1,800 each, six at $1,600 each, ten at $1,400 
each, five at $1,200 each; total $37,000. 

Regional officers—four at $3,500 each, eight at $3,000 each; total, $38,000. 

Clerks and stenographers in regional offices—four at $1,400 each, four 
at $1,200 each; total, $10,400. 

For printing, stationery, illustrative material, $75,000. 

For traveling and subsistence, $30,000. 

Rent of regional offices, $5,000. 

Part-time expert help in preparing material for teaching, $50,000. 

Ten short-course training schools for supervisors and directors and those 
who will train teachers, $20,000. 

Incidentals and contingencies, $7,000. 

Sec. 4. That the balance of the amount appropriated by section 2 re- 
Maining after making the deduction authorized by section 3 shall be ap- 
portioned by the Secretary of the Interior among and allotted to the several 
States in the ratio which the number of resident illiterates and other persons 
unable to understand, speak, read, or write the English language, sixteen 
years of age and over, bears to the number of resident illiterates and other 
persons unable to understand, speak, read, or write the English language, 
sixteen years of age and over, within continental United States, exclusive 
of the District of Columbia and the Territory of Alaska, according to the 
last published United States census: Provided, That the total sum allotted 
to any State shall not be less than $5,000 for any fiscal year. 

Sec. 5. That no money shall be paid to a State until it shall through its 
legislature— 

(a) Accept the provisions of this Act; 

(b) Designate an appropriate official to act as custodian of such money; 

(c) Authorize its department of education or chief school officer to co- 
operate with the United States in the work herein authorized; 

(d) Appropriate or make available for the purposes of this Act an amount 
equal to that allotted to the State by the United States; 

(e) Require all resident persons, whether citizens of the United States or 
aliens, sixteen years of age or over and under twenty-one years of age, who 
are not physically or mentally disqualified and who are illiterate or unable 
to understand, speak, read, or write the English language, to attend classes 
of instruction for not less than two hundred hours per annum until they 


18 


shall have completed a specified course prepared by the Department of 
Education or chief school officer of the State and approved by the Secre- 
tary of the Interior: Provided, That this shall not apply to those who are 
in this country temporarily for sojourn or business; 

(f) Provide, as far as possible and practicable, for the education of resi- 
dent persons, whether citizens of the United States or aliens, of the age 
of twenty-one years or more and less than fifty years, who are illiterate or 
unable to speak, read, or write the English language: Provided, That any 
course of education or instruction under this subdivision or under subdivision 
e shall especially include instruction in American history, the fundamentals 
of civil government, and the principles of the Constitution of the United 
States: Provided, further, That such course of education or instruction shall 
not be compulsory: 

(zg) Require the preparation and submission to the Secretary of the In- 
terior annually of rules and regulations designed to enforce the provisions 

(h) Require the submission annually to the Secretary of the Interior 

of such State law and the rules and regulations of the Secretary of the 
Interior; 
a report which shall show the (1) plan for administration and supervision, 
(2) courses of study, (3) methods and kind of instruction, (4) equipment, 
(5) qualifications of teachers, supervisors, directors of education, and other 
necessary administrative officers or employees, (6) plans for the prepara- 
tion of teachers, supervisors, and directors of education, and (7) receipts 
and expenditures of money for the preceding fiscal year: Provided, That if 
the governor of any State, the legislature of which does not convene before 
the year 1921, shall accept the provisions of this Act and cause such co- 
operation with the Secretary of the Interior as herein provided, such State 
shall be entitled to the benefits of this Act, and the Secretary of the In- 
terior may cause to be expended in such State, until the legislature of such 
State convenes and has been in session sixty days, so much of the sums 
allotted to that State for the fiscal year as he may determine necessary for 
the purpose of this Act: And provided further, That any appropriation 
or donation by a county, municipality, local authority, school, corporation, 
partnership, society, or individual available for the purposes of this Act 
under the direction of the State board of education or chief school officer 
of the State may be accepted by the Secretary of the Interior as an ap- 
propriation by the State. 

Sec. 6. That none of the sums herein appropriated, or appropriated or 
made available by or in any of the States, to carry out the provisions of 
this Act shall be used for the education of persons of less than sixteen 
years of age, or, except as provided by section 3, for any purpose other than 
the payment of salaries of teachers, supervisors, or directors of education, 
or for the preparation of teachers, supervisors, and directors of education. 

Sec. 7. That the Secretary of the Interior shall (a) withhold the unpaid 
portion of an allotment to any State whenever he determines that any por- 
tion of the sums allotted are not being properly applied for the purposes 
of this Act, or may (b) deduct from the next succeeding allotment to any 
State a sum equal to that portion,of the previous allotment paid to the 
State and which he determines has not been expended for the purposes 
of this Act: Provided, That no such deduction shall be made until one 
year after the opening of the first legislative session convened in such State 
after the passage of this Act. 

Sec. 8. That any portion of an allotment to any State which remains 
unpaid at the end of a fiscal year shall be treated as an unexpended balance 
of the appropriation of that year. 

Sec. 9. That the Secretary of the Interior shall annually ascertain whether 
the several States are using or are prepared to use the money allotted to 
or received by them under this Act, and shall certify, on or before the 
10th day of August of each year, to the Secretary of the Treasury (a) each 
State which has accepted the provisions of this Act and complied there- 
with; (b) the amount which each State is entitled to receive. 


Sec. 10. That the Secretary of the Treasury upon the certification of 
the Secretary of the Interior made on the 15th day of August, November, 
February, and May of each year shall pay to the custodian of such sums 


19 


in each State the money to which it is entitled under the provisions of this 
Act for the ensuing quarter. The money so received by the State shall be 
paid out on the requisition of the department of education or chief school 
officer for services already rendered or expenditures already incurred and 
approved by such department or officer. 

Sec. 11. That the Secretary of the Interior shall make a report to Con- 
gress before December 1 of each year of all operations, expenditures, and 
allotments under the provisions of this Act, and shall include therein the 
reports made by the several States on the administration of this Act and the 
expenditure of money allotted. 

S. 3315——2. 


20 








